ArticleInternational orthopaedics2020
The Lefèvre retentive cup compared with the dual mobility cup in total hip arthroplasty revision for dislocation.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLimiting the risk of dislocation is one of the main aims of both dual mobility and Lefèvre retentive cups. However, these devices have never been compared. The goal of our study was to compare these devices in total hip arthroplasty revisions for instability. The judgement criterion was non-recurrence of dislocation in a follow-up period of eight years.
methodsThis retrospective case-control study compared two continuous paired series of total hip arthroplasty revisions for instability. These series included 63 patients and 159 patients with implantation of a Lefèvre retentive cup and a dual mobility cup, respectively.
resultsThe success rate at eight years (i.e., no recurrence) was 91 ± 0.05% and 95 ± 0.02% in the Lefèvre retentive cup and dual mobility groups, respectively. The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.6).
conclusionIt seems that the Lefèvre retentive cup provides comparable outcomes with the dual mobility cup in the total hip arthroplasty revisions for instability, avoiding recurrence in long term.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.